About your Search

20130106
20130114
Search Results 0 to 5 of about 6
at the fence and look at senator hagel and others, there's a lot of issues surrounding that. the science area is where we have to stay focused. whoever the president would like to serve in his discretion, obviously, that's his call. i don't want to judge where he's going on what motivated him to make that decision, but, clearly, anyone who fills the roles, we would seek to have a good relationship to base policy development in sound science and to pursue the mutual interests that we can find, the commonground we can find in the policy development. as i mentioned to one of the earlier questions today, we had a good dialogue over the past couple months, and we have areas that we disagree on. we represent a broader industry that sometimes sees the world differently than perhaps a regulator might. we support robust regulation, but we believe regulation should be thoughtful, and it should be based in science, and that's what drives our conversation in dealing with the regulators. we welcome the opportunity to work with whoever the president may nominate, whoever the president can get confirmed in
. does that mean you're going to be upset with your likely new boss, chuck hagel, who argues for a smaller budget? thank you. [laughter] >> well, first off, i'm not sure what the president would announce today, and if i did know, i wouldn't scoop him on that. i'm smart enough not to do that. [laughter] and i think if it's senator hagel, we will work with him, and we will work with the american people. defense budgets are about risk. you get a certain amount of money, you get a certain amount of risk. if the country decides they want to take some more risk, we can go with lower budgets. we'll need to work with whoever is the nominee today, and assuming that person is confirmed, to try to make those trade-offs. they're hard to do, but we'll find another way to do them. >> a hand in that same row? okay. further back all the way to the wall, please. >> [inaudible] broadcasting. on the pacific realignment defense bill -- [inaudible] money for guam and okinawa because there's no -- [inaudible] the department has submitted to congress, and the senate and house have been saying this
to the tail. >> host: how do senate democrats vote on the name nation of senator chuck hagel? >> guest: organizationally, we have not played into that. groups including iraq veterans, j-street who focus on those issues, and they can talk about that. >> host: carol, arizona, independent caller, hi, carol. >> caller: hi, i was just wanting to ask about the tax reform if you would be straight across the board tax, no loopholes. >> host: adam green. >> guest: opposite of a flat tax is a progressive tax. i would oppose that, but here's why. the simple reason why is that the rich need to pay their fair share, and pretty much every study done shows flat tax increases taxes on the little guy. it's that simple. another idea on the table talking about this. you know, oftentimes, the conclusions in washington are based on what choice did we have on the table which means if they exclude certain choices from being in the discussion, good choices can't be made. a great choice would be congresswoman's millionaire tax going beyond clinton rates, but it's supported in the country saying we're going to
. ♪ ♪ [music playing] ♪ chuck hagel was in vietnam war, with the former senator of nebraska from 1997 until 2009, and was the atlantic council chairman. you can watch today's announcement on c-span.org. up next, on "communicators", a conversation with technology reporters. later tonight on c-span2, a report on immigration enforcement in the united states.
to actually make it pass. tony. >> senator hagel's likely if he's confirmed to be secretary of defense by march 1st. what kind of leadership challenges does this pose to him? what -- can he do anything to ameliorate it or send out signals -- if he says this is going to be his first-day challenge, what not advice to him, but where does he control the debate at all or the actual consequences? >> yeah. i don't know that there's a lot that the sec def -- whoever it is at that time -- can really do other than try to be, you know, straightforward and open with the congress and the american people about what the real impacts are going to be. not the hyperbole, not just talking points, but coming out with what the real impacts are going to be and let people know and make an informed decision about what's best for the country. i think that's about the best that any secretary of defense could do in this situation. and i actually want to go on. my last slide here before we close, i know we're getting close to 11:00, is, you know, you put all this together, and what we have coming here in the next
in a few moments expected to nominate chuck hagel as the next defense secretary and counterterrorism adviser john brennan to be the next head of the cia. announcements set for just after one o'clock eastern from the east room of the white house. live coverage will be on our companion network, c-span. join us later today for two q&a programs starting at 6 p.m. eastern, focusing on george may onsowfort professor walterwomans talk -- walter williams, and his libertarian views and how he's been a guest host on the rush limbaugh show. we discuss "citizen soldier" which gets underway at 6 p.m. eastern here on c-span2. >> i think cybersecurity remains the top priority because of the national security implications. we saw that congress failed to reach an agreement on cybersecurity legislation on 2012 as many would have predicted. they remain far apart because industry is very opposed to any sort of cyber security standards. >> i think another big issue is going to be implementing the incentive options to create more spectrum so the ftc has its sleeves rolled up, in the midst of working on th
Search Results 0 to 5 of about 6

Terms of Use (10 Mar 2001)